SpoiledMan
New member
PAW said:
That was set to happen right after a certain person was convicted of doing something against someone's will but er eh.....
This will affect us all
- Thread starter Mr. Chemist
- Start date
That was set to happen right after a certain person was convicted of doing something against someone's will but er eh.....
hirosh said:
Sadly, that is very true. Why do you think some politicans want to tax the rich so much? Not enough rich people to beat them.
Like a lack of scientific proof has ever mattered to them.... :lol
I am all for being good stewards of the enviroment, I'd like my kids to have a nice world to live in but some of this stuff is so statistically insignificant.
a.k.a. Patrick
New member
A little off tangent but equally important. We all know how the EPA has restricted car washing all over the country, due to pollution runoff to lakes and stream, and ultimately the ocean. They call it illicit discharge. Was there never a concen for insecticides and pesticides, and fertilizers on front lawns, that run into the streets gutter day in and day out ? Could this also contribute to acid rain? Ozone depletion thru evaporation? It really pisses me off that the city i live in wont let me wash a car on private property with about 2.5 gls of water, but will let the same homeowner apply fertilizers, and pesticides on there landscape, and its ok if it runs to oceans, rivers and lakes?
Corey Bit Spank
Active member
a.k.a. Patrick said:
'Tis why my parents stopped getting our lawn fertilized a few years back and we only apply grub control in fall.
I suppose having living fish in the Niagara River is more important to them then having a green lawn. :nixweiss
SilverLexus
Super Enthusiast
Fertilizer is mostly natural chemicals like nitrogen, potassium and phosphates. I doubt these chemicals can impact fish unless there is something else going on. There are certainly ways to do both. Everyone is my suburb fertilizes regularly and the only thing that results is a gorgeous lawn.
I'm glad to be in Georgia where the air is clean and the green regulations a lot less uptight and out of control than California that's for sure.
If you want a more balanced view on the environment read Bjorn Lomborg's "The Skeptical Environmentalist". You will see compelling evidence that world is actually doing fine.
I'm glad to be in Georgia where the air is clean and the green regulations a lot less uptight and out of control than California that's for sure.
If you want a more balanced view on the environment read Bjorn Lomborg's "The Skeptical Environmentalist". You will see compelling evidence that world is actually doing fine.
Corey Bit Spank
Active member
SilverLexus said:
Our lawn actually looks better then it did when we had them fertilize it. :nixweiss
Mr. Chemist
New member
I'm back from the seminar. This seminar's only purpose was to learn how to fill out the latest product survey form from CARB. It was in no way a forum for discussion about the merits of their regulations. Those discussions take place at other venues.
There were at least 125 people in attendance. Each person probably cost their respective company about a thousand dollars to attend this conference. When we are in full negotiations with CARB we will attend a similar function 6 to 10 times a year.
In reading your comments please let me say the following:
Please do not confuse "ground level ozone" with the supposed shrinking of the ozone layer...these are two completely different issues with completely different concerns...not related.
When regulations went into effect on hair sprays...the industry was devastated. They had to create and sell products that were half as effective and much more expensive. Not only that but the consumers were using twice as much as well as throwing away massive amounts of unused and ineffective products. This was several years ago and although their formulations have improved, I was sitting on an airplane next to an executive from a cosmetic manufacturer on the way to Chicago...and we discussed this issue and believe me they are still reeling from it.
Paint and coatings were also similarly affected....great, now we have 50 percent less VOC's in the product but we have to use more paint and do the job twice as often....
I have been able to successfully formulate our products to be in compliance with these new regulations...it has been a very time consuming and costly adventure. The only downside from a performance standpoint that I have noticed in these new formulations, is that they dry a bit slower....you guys will obviously notice...but the average consumer may not. I think we can live with that...not that we have a choice.
My biggest fear is that the regulations that dont even go into effect until January 2005...are already on the radar scope for further regulation. Refomulation is a time consumming and costly propostion.
There were at least 125 people in attendance. Each person probably cost their respective company about a thousand dollars to attend this conference. When we are in full negotiations with CARB we will attend a similar function 6 to 10 times a year.
In reading your comments please let me say the following:
Please do not confuse "ground level ozone" with the supposed shrinking of the ozone layer...these are two completely different issues with completely different concerns...not related.
When regulations went into effect on hair sprays...the industry was devastated. They had to create and sell products that were half as effective and much more expensive. Not only that but the consumers were using twice as much as well as throwing away massive amounts of unused and ineffective products. This was several years ago and although their formulations have improved, I was sitting on an airplane next to an executive from a cosmetic manufacturer on the way to Chicago...and we discussed this issue and believe me they are still reeling from it.
Paint and coatings were also similarly affected....great, now we have 50 percent less VOC's in the product but we have to use more paint and do the job twice as often....
I have been able to successfully formulate our products to be in compliance with these new regulations...it has been a very time consuming and costly adventure. The only downside from a performance standpoint that I have noticed in these new formulations, is that they dry a bit slower....you guys will obviously notice...but the average consumer may not. I think we can live with that...not that we have a choice.
My biggest fear is that the regulations that dont even go into effect until January 2005...are already on the radar scope for further regulation. Refomulation is a time consumming and costly propostion.
imported_memnuts
New member
Thanks for the update, Mr. Chemist :xyxthumbs
Scottwax said:
Multiply that number by the population of California and you have your answer. Anything auto related is a huge problem in CA, because there are so many cars. Paint, fueling processes, wax, it all adds up. Especially since the geography of many areas of CA contribute to SMOG.
Jason
SVR
Dream Machines
I've now banned acid, alcohol and ammonia based products.
Mr. Chemist
New member
All of those chemicals have a place in the chemical world and vastly improve quality of life. When used responsibly they are safe and effective. The products you have mentioned have little environmental impact.
SVR
Dream Machines
My friend has to work at a place where everything they must use contains these chemicals and he has had to wear gloves due to the acid burning his skin, the alcohol and acid get in the air and are harmful to humans.
Certain acid products including fallout removers soften the paint making it easier to scratch, alcohol glass cleaners are hazardous to tinted and untinted modern glass and ammonia is horrendous.
Alcohol tyre dressings can dry out the rubber and overspray gets everywhere.
Certain acid products including fallout removers soften the paint making it easier to scratch, alcohol glass cleaners are hazardous to tinted and untinted modern glass and ammonia is horrendous.
Alcohol tyre dressings can dry out the rubber and overspray gets everywhere.
imported_DetailGirl1
New member
Well what can we do as citizens to help out? Which products should we avoid? If we "have" to use said product, what is the safest way. I am always looking at ways to improve the environment starting with voting for John Kerry.Mr. Chemist said:
stiege said:
Ah, then change the geography and you will have a bigger impact, right?
If the cities in California (and all other large cities) would just synchronize their traffic lights better, they'd make a significant reduction in air pollution. Here in Arlington, even late at night, the traffic lights operate like they do during rush hour. Side streets with no traffic get a light so cars on the main streets just sit there, idling at lights for no reason. Time waster and polluter. What did the metroplex (DFW area) do instead? Lowered the speed limit on freeways in the metro area from 65 to 60. Other than they get to write more speeding tickets, no change in actual pollution. Stupid solutions like that really tick me off. [/rant]
Corey Bit Spank
Active member
Scottwax said:Ah, then change the geography and you will have a bigger impact, right?
If the cities in California (and all other large cities) would just synchronize their traffic lights better, they'd make a significant reduction in air pollution. Here in Arlington, even late at night, the traffic lights operate like they do during rush hour. Side streets with no traffic get a light so cars on the main streets just sit there, idling at lights for no reason. Time waster and polluter. What did the metroplex (DFW area) do instead? Lowered the speed limit on freeways in the metro area from 65 to 60. Other than they get to write more speeding tickets, no change in actual pollution. Stupid solutions like that really tick me off. [/rant]
We don't have this problem in Buffalo, as people don't actually stop IN buffalo...they drive right through. :bow